I understand your frustration that those guys have not been caught yet (they will eventually) but now I feel the same frustration but didn't we know that "anti-terrorism" laws and surveillance are ineffective in practice ? I remember this objection being made at the time these laws were proposed.
Then again this is actually beneficial to a surveillance state as this can be used to put even more surveillance and get the population to accept it.
This is no different as using CP and piracy as pretexts for Internet censorship, or from a web company running on investor story time admitting that advertising revenue currently sucks but this means there is much room for improvement.
If you drank the koolaid and actually believe that surveillance was effective in preventing terrorism or catching terrorists afterwards, well I'm sorry you got duped.
i'm sorry but the argument saying that surveillance would only affect innocent civilians is just as sily as saying it would only affect terrorists. Either the state has the effective ability to track people's activity, or it doesn't.
My comment was just to show that, currently, the state's ability to monitor people ( in general, in france) is, contrarely to what all the posts about privacy on HN tend to suggest,still very very limited.
Then again this is actually beneficial to a surveillance state as this can be used to put even more surveillance and get the population to accept it.
This is no different as using CP and piracy as pretexts for Internet censorship, or from a web company running on investor story time admitting that advertising revenue currently sucks but this means there is much room for improvement.
If you drank the koolaid and actually believe that surveillance was effective in preventing terrorism or catching terrorists afterwards, well I'm sorry you got duped.